The Truth About Cars » JD Power The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news. Thu, 17 Jul 2014 15:46:48 +0000 en-US hourly 1 The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news. The Truth About Cars no The Truth About Cars (The Truth About Cars) 2006-2009 The Truth About Cars The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news. The Truth About Cars » JD Power Land Rover and JD Power Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:00:19 +0000

Some things never change. Lying politicians, for example. And racist YouTube commenters. But also the JD Power Long-Term Vehicle Dependability Study, which was just released for 2013. Like always, Lexus and Lincoln were near the top, proving that old people can’t figure out in-car computer systems well enough to give them low ratings. Porsche was also near the top, proving that at least one German brand still has some idea what it’s doing.

Of course, you already knew who topped the JD Power study because it was covered by every other website, including your local news affiliates, which have those annoying banner ads that expand as the page opens. Note to advertisers: no one in human history has ever willingly clicked on one of those ads, or will ever click on one of those ads, or will ever buy a product just because their screen was briefly invaded by one of those ads. Unless, perhaps, the ad is touting Lincoln’s placement in the latest JD Power survey, and the reader is an old person.

What your local news probably didn’t cover, however, is another aspect of the JD Power survey that never changes: Land Rover’s position. You see, for the umpteenth year running, Land Rover displayed its unending commitment to quality by finishing dead last. And since we’re doing our part to tell the truth about cars, I felt it was my duty to cover this automotive milestone.

The Study


Before we go any further, it’s important to understand how the study works. There are two ways you can do this: one, you can read JD Power’s explanation, as I did, which is “summarized” in a 1,500-word press release that includes an embedded video and uses the word “vehicle” 38 times. In fact, the word “vehicle” appears as often as the word “of.” Truly.

Your second choice is to just read my explanation.

Are you with me? I thought so.

JD Power has two commonly reported vehicle studies, both of which Land Rover traditionally wins, provided you hold them upside down. One is the Initial Quality Study, which measures problems in the first three months of ownership. The one being discussed here is the Long-Term Vehicle Dependability Study, which measure problems in the first three years of ownership. That means this study is looking at 2010 models, which explains the Ford Ranger’s appearance.

To collect reliability data, JD Power surveys thousands of vehicle owners. Once it has the numbers, JD Power tallies things up based on the number of problems, on average, faced by 100 vehicles over three years. This is pretty self-explanatory, or – if you’re JD Power – it requires a nine-minute video explanation from a guy whose hair is parted in the middle.

One last word on JD Power’s study: the definition of “problem.” According to the study’s methodology, a problem can be one of two things: either an actual issue faced by the vehicle, or something the customer just doesn’t like. Maybe you think there’s too much wind noise, for example. Problem. Or maybe you think the cruise control stalk looks phallic. Problem. We’ll get to the impact of this definition on Land Rover in a minute.

How did Land Rover do?

I’m not going to sugarcoat it: Land Rover had 220 problems per 100 vehicles. The average TTAC reader might be saying, “That’s not so bad over three years! My Crown Vic leaks water every time it rains through the holes for the light bar!” or possibly, “We’re 600 words into this and you haven’t made a joke about Land Rovers and fire yet?”

To them, I say: for perspective, Lexus had only 71 problems per 100 vehicles. And we know most of Lexus’s problems stemmed from the owner’s manual font size being too small, while most of Land Rover’s were because the towing eye is difficult to locate in the vehicle’s charred remains. Boom – there it is.

It gets worse. While most brands were separated by one or two problems per 100 vehicles, Land Rover was 30 problems behind the next-worst brand, Dodge. That means Land Rover would have to trim 30 problems per 100 vehicles – or nearly half of Lexus’s entire score – in order to become second worst.

Most importantly, this is not exactly uncharted territory for Land Rover. I went back through the last few Vehicle Dependability Studies and discovered that Land Rover typically ends up in one of three places: dead last, damn near last, or not included because the sample size wasn’t large enough. One year, they had 344 problems per 100 vehicles. Truly.

Is it really that bad?

Beyond customer satisfaction, Land Rover’s resale value is most affected by its reliability woes. No one keeps a Land Rover beyond the warranty period, meaning the market is full of three-year-old Land Rovers with ticking time bomb suspension, electricals, engines and transmissions. Between the abundance of used models and the obvious potential pitfalls, used-car shoppers stay away.

Most people think car companies don’t care about resale value, but there’s one big reason they do: leasing. Remember, leasing a car is basically paying the depreciation for the period you own it, plus a little profit for the automaker. If the car depreciates substantially, one of two things rise: either lease payments or manufacturer subvention. Both are bad news for car companies. Just ask the king of depreciation, Jaguar, whose latest XJ sedan is already in the $40k range on the used market.

But I see Land Rovers everywhere!

And that’s the rub. While you and I view the above as fodder for jokes, there are two highly important camps who don’t really care what we think. That would be Land Rover North America, and Land Rover owners themselves. Land Rover North America doesn’t care because even with the problems and the effect on lease business, they still sell every SUV they make. Except, of course, the LR2, which may exist solely to provide transportation for service customers. Land Rover owners don’t care because they just want to drive a car they think is cool; damn the issues.

The interesting thing is that, given JD Power’s methodology and Land Rover owner attitudes, you’d expect the brand to do better on JD Power’s studies. You’d think, for example, that a Land Rover owner would be willing to overlook a little wind noise here, or a vehicle fire there, just because they love the product.

But the bad survey scores say that isn’t the case. They know about the problems, yet they buy Land Rovers anyway – purely because they like them. In fact, it’s sort of like how you bought that Crown Vic with the holes in the roof.

Maybe you have more in common with the average Land Rover owner than you think.

]]> 151
The Truth About JD Power’s 2010 Vehicle Dependability Survey Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:46:08 +0000

I conduct a car reliability survey at Since we promptly update our results four times a year, we can report on new models ahead of anyone else. Last year, we announced that the 2009 Jaguar XF was faring poorly. This provoked a blistering backlash from owners at a particular Jaguar forum. In the end, threads on reliability were deleted and future ones all but banned in the interest of preserving what remained of the UK auto industry.

The outraged owners argued that TrueDelta’s results could not be correct, since Jaguar had just been declared the most dependable make by J.D. Power. I pointed out that the VDS covers the third year of ownership, 2006 in that case, and that Jaguar had discontinued, redesigned, or replaced every model in its line save the XJ in the interim. So the results did not apply to the XF, or the current XK for that matter.

Well, J.D. Power has now released the 2010 Vehicle Dependability Survey (VDS), which covers 2007s in their third year of ownership, and, as predicted, the redesigned XK has, all by its lonesome, sunk Jaguar’s ranking from 1st to 23rd. And it’ll only get uglier once the XF is reflected in these stats in another two years.

#1 this year: Porsche. Many people will wonder how Porsche fared so well. One likely factor: Porsches are often weekend cars that aren’t driven much. J.D. Power might consider doing what TrueDelta does, and post average odometer readings. A larger factor: THERE WAS NO 2007 CAYENNE—Porsche skipped straight from 2006 to 2008. The Cayenne is likely more troublesome than the sports cars, and is certainly driven more. So don’t expect a top VDS score for Porsche next year, when the Cayenne is again part of the mix.

“Long term” for J.D. Power continues to mean “the third year of ownership.” It used to mean the fifth year, but manufacturers have little use for fifth-year data, and this survey primarily exists to serve manufacturers willing to pay large sums for detailed results.

Many car buyers, though, are much more interested in how cars fare after the 3/36 warranty ends. J.D. Power has no information for them, hoping that car buyers will accept third-year problem frequencies as a sufficient indicator of how a car will perform over the long haul. Unfortunately, in many cases it is not. TrueDelta’s data suggest that all too often cars take a turn for the worse either soon after the warranty ends or after 100,000 miles.

As usual, the public gets brand-level scores rather than model-level scores from J.D. Power. Brand-level scores are of limited use for a car buyer, and can actually misinform as much as they inform. After all, people don’t buy the entire line. They buy a particular model. And the scores of models can vary widely within a brand.

Much is made of which brands did better this year (Porsche, Lincoln), and which did worse (Jaguar). Well, as noted above, the brand averages can be heavily influenced by the introduction of a single new design or the absence of a single old design.

For these and other reasons a focus on model-level scores would be much more valid and useful.

Also worth noting: as in the past most makes are tightly bunched around the average, 155 problems per 100 cars this year. Consumer Reports considers any score within 20 percent of the average in its own survey to be “about average.” Applying this metric to J.D. Power’s results, 21 of the 36 brands are “about average.”

J.D. Power notes that for Cadillac, Ford, Hyundai, Lincoln, and Mercury perceptions of reliability lag reality. No surprise, since (as I’ve found all too often) people often judge (and more often than not reject) data based on how these data fit their perceptions rather than judging their perceptions based on how they fit the data.

J.D. Power’s explicit solution: convince consumers of gains in reliability. The implicit solution: pay to include VDS results in your ads. But are perceptions based on the VDS any more likely to be correct? Or, as seen in the Porsche and Jaguar cases, are they just as often part of the problem?

Michael Karesh owns and operates TrueDelta, an online source of vehicle pricing and reliability data

]]> 59